EcoBoost 1.0-liter EOY 3 Years in a Row
- Thread starter tenderloin
- Start date
- Status
Quote:
As Ford describes it, the 1.0 liter can fit into an airplane overhead luggage compartment, but packed into that space is a system for cooling exhaust temperatures that provides for an optimal fuel-to-air ratio.
Interesting. I'd suspect it is to raise water temp all the faster, get the engine up to temp quicker. But I don't know how the exhaust is routed out of the engine, and it may well have a long exhaust manifold. Actually, now that I think about it, I bet it gets real hot between head and turbo, so cooling there may well be necessary.
As Ford describes it, the 1.0 liter can fit into an airplane overhead luggage compartment, but packed into that space is a system for cooling exhaust temperatures that provides for an optimal fuel-to-air ratio.
Interesting. I'd suspect it is to raise water temp all the faster, get the engine up to temp quicker. But I don't know how the exhaust is routed out of the engine, and it may well have a long exhaust manifold. Actually, now that I think about it, I bet it gets real hot between head and turbo, so cooling there may well be necessary.
One MAJOR flaw with that engine - timing belt.
Get rid of the glorified rubber band that is keeping the engine from self-destructing and we have a real winner.
Get rid of the glorified rubber band that is keeping the engine from self-destructing and we have a real winner.
Originally Posted By: supton
Quote:
As Ford describes it, the 1.0 liter can fit into an airplane overhead luggage compartment, but packed into that space is a system for cooling exhaust temperatures that provides for an optimal fuel-to-air ratio.
Interesting. I'd suspect it is to raise water temp all the faster, get the engine up to temp quicker. But I don't know how the exhaust is routed out of the engine, and it may well have a long exhaust manifold. Actually, now that I think about it, I bet it gets real hot between head and turbo, so cooling there may well be necessary.
The integrated exhaust manifold allows water jackets to be placed around the exhaust valves and exhaust ports to reduce the exhaust valve seat and valve temperatures. In a typical non integrated exhaust manifold cylinder head, fuel enrichment is used to keep the exhaust valve and seat temperatures below some critical threshold.
By reducing the temperature to these components with water cooling instead of fuel cooling (evaporative cooling that reduces the combustion temperature), you can maintain an "optimal fuel-to-air ratio." In plain english, this means they use less fuel enrichment. I have seen other engines with integrated manifolds that still rely on some level enrichment at high speed high load conditions.
Integrated exhaust manifolds also reduce part count and improve manufacturability. From a power and performance perspective, my opinion is that there is a compromise in performance to improve efficiency.
Quote:
As Ford describes it, the 1.0 liter can fit into an airplane overhead luggage compartment, but packed into that space is a system for cooling exhaust temperatures that provides for an optimal fuel-to-air ratio.
Interesting. I'd suspect it is to raise water temp all the faster, get the engine up to temp quicker. But I don't know how the exhaust is routed out of the engine, and it may well have a long exhaust manifold. Actually, now that I think about it, I bet it gets real hot between head and turbo, so cooling there may well be necessary.
The integrated exhaust manifold allows water jackets to be placed around the exhaust valves and exhaust ports to reduce the exhaust valve seat and valve temperatures. In a typical non integrated exhaust manifold cylinder head, fuel enrichment is used to keep the exhaust valve and seat temperatures below some critical threshold.
By reducing the temperature to these components with water cooling instead of fuel cooling (evaporative cooling that reduces the combustion temperature), you can maintain an "optimal fuel-to-air ratio." In plain english, this means they use less fuel enrichment. I have seen other engines with integrated manifolds that still rely on some level enrichment at high speed high load conditions.
Integrated exhaust manifolds also reduce part count and improve manufacturability. From a power and performance perspective, my opinion is that there is a compromise in performance to improve efficiency.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
One MAJOR flaw with that engine - timing belt.
Get rid of the glorified rubber band that is keeping the engine from self-destructing and we have a real winner.
This will get your dander up: It's bathed in motor oil (for reduced friction).
One MAJOR flaw with that engine - timing belt.
Get rid of the glorified rubber band that is keeping the engine from self-destructing and we have a real winner.
This will get your dander up: It's bathed in motor oil (for reduced friction).
I must say, the Fiesta with this engine is a darn great car and decently quick for being a 3 banger!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0CukuVJqSM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0CukuVJqSM
Honestly I think timing belt is a better design than timing chain.. except for the need for replacement.
Many timing chains dont last the life of the engine.. make noise, have issues with guides etc.
This isnt a typical belt design its actually a wet timing belt design with motor oil... Whats the replacement interval?
Many timing chains dont last the life of the engine.. make noise, have issues with guides etc.
This isnt a typical belt design its actually a wet timing belt design with motor oil... Whats the replacement interval?
Timing belts are inherently superior to timing chains in a number of ways.
They are more efficient, simpler, smoother, quieter, more precise, more compact, lighter, and cheaper to manufacture than timing chains. These are the reasons that manufacturers started using them in the first place.
The one drawback to having timing belts is that consumers don't like them because they require periodic replacement (increasing maintenance costs), and if they are not replaced, they can break, but then, so can a timing chain. I know that they are not supposed to break, but they definitely can and do! And, if a timing chain does break it will cause the same kind of damage to an interference engine that a broken timing belt can cause, plus a LOT more when the broken (and expensive) chain and other damaged components are factored in.
They are more efficient, simpler, smoother, quieter, more precise, more compact, lighter, and cheaper to manufacture than timing chains. These are the reasons that manufacturers started using them in the first place.
The one drawback to having timing belts is that consumers don't like them because they require periodic replacement (increasing maintenance costs), and if they are not replaced, they can break, but then, so can a timing chain. I know that they are not supposed to break, but they definitely can and do! And, if a timing chain does break it will cause the same kind of damage to an interference engine that a broken timing belt can cause, plus a LOT more when the broken (and expensive) chain and other damaged components are factored in.
Yawn, its a snowmobile engine.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Rand
... Whats the replacement interval?
None required apparently. Articles here:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...ubr#Post2975117
... Whats the replacement interval?
None required apparently. Articles here:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...ubr#Post2975117
- Status
Similar threads
